Donald Trump may have won a second term in office. But he’s not out of the woods yet.
And now a top U.S. lawyer has gone nuclear on a federal judge for this atrocious Trump ruling.
When Donald Trump won a second term in office, it was extremely clear to everyone that it was time to let go of all the law-fare being waged against him and his allies. It was clear from the beginning to so many people that it was all just a farce designed to keep him from being able to win a second term in office. It didn’t work and he’s headed to the White House for another four years anyway.
He has the power to pardon himself for truly anything too, meaning all the law-fare targeting him is pointless. There’s nothing that can stop him from being installed into the Oval Office except the Good Lord Himself. Though that’s the case, some Trump haters are still trying to take their shot at the man, the myth, the legend Donald Trump. Including a sitting federal judge who is refusing to toss the laughable Manhattan “hush money” case that Trump was “convicted” in.
Judge Merchan’s Controversial Ruling Exposes Media’s Flawed Narrative on Presidential Immunity
In a stunning turn of events, Judge Juan Merchan’s decision to uphold President-elect Donald Trump’s conviction has inadvertently exposed the media’s exaggerated portrayal of the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling. This development, highlighted by renowned legal expert Jonathan Turley, reveals a stark contrast between judicial reality and media hysteria.
Merchan’s refusal to dismiss Trump’s 34-count conviction related to alleged hush money payments has raised eyebrows in legal circles. The judge’s decision, far from aligning with the media’s doomsday predictions, demonstrates a nuanced interpretation of presidential immunity.
Turley, a respected voice in constitutional law, pointed out the glaring discrepancy between Merchan’s ruling and the media’s alarmist rhetoric. “Merchan really iron-plated this decision,” Turley explained, outlining the judge’s multi-layered reasoning that effectively circumvented immunity concerns.
This ruling stands in stark opposition to the Left-wing media’s fear-mongering about the Supreme Court’s immunity decision. Contrary to hysterical claims of creating a “law-free zone” for presidents, Merchan’s ruling suggests that lower courts can easily find exceptions to presidential immunity.
The media’s overblown reaction to the Supreme Court’s ruling now appears misguided at best and deliberately misleading at worst. Their dire predictions of unchecked presidential power have been contradicted by Merchan’s straightforward application of legal principles.
The Consequences Of A Dishonest Media
This case highlights a troubling pattern of media bias and judicial overreach. Merchan’s decision, while legally intricate, raises questions about the impartiality of the judicial system when dealing with high-profile political figures.
The suggestion by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to delay Trump’s sentencing until after his potential second term is particularly concerning. Turley rightly criticizes this as a “horrific idea” that could have far-reaching negative consequences for both the nation and the legal system.
A Pattern of Politically Motivated Prosecutions?
The dismissal of cases brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith after Trump’s election victory further demonstrates the political nature of these legal challenges. The timing and circumstances of these cases suggest a coordinated effort to use the legal system for political ends.
Similarly, the ongoing saga in Fulton County, Georgia, where District Attorney Fani Willis faces scrutiny over potential conflicts of interest, adds another layer to the complex web of legal and ethical questions surrounding these prosecutions.
The Conservative Column will keep you updated on any major updates in the remaining Trump legal cases.
